We also know that, despite Wisconsin(and the country) being a center left state, with the election of Robin Vos and Scott Fitzgerald as the republican "leaders"(term used loosely), that the republican party of Wisconsin has doubled down on a FAR right agenda!

Now after the election, all of the far right extremist groups are coming out of the woodwork to ask for their "gifts" for helping the republicans regain control of our state government. The problem is, the republicans are very eager to grant them anything they wish(despite the fact it goes against everything they campaigned on, but we are used to that in WI)!

The state's largest anti-abortion group sees opportunities to place
further regulations on abortion, including requiring women seeking the
procedure to view an ultrasound of her fetus.

Wisconsin Right to Life is also proposing banning abortions that
would cause pain to the fetus, barring abortions that are sought based
on the sex of the fetus and prohibiting the ability of state employees
to use their state health care plans to access abortions.

There of course is more:

Requiring ultrasounds and banning certain abortions based on fetal
pain follow a wave of legislation around the country. Backers of
abortion say if put into law in Wisconsin, they could prompt lawsuits.

"These bills represent much of what we're seeing across the country,"
said Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the Guttmacher Institute,
a reproductive health research group that supports abortion rights.

Abortion opponents were disappointed by President Barack Obama's
re-election and the ability of Democrats to retain control of the U.S.
Senate. But Wisconsin Right to Life noted in an email to supporters that
the election also put all of Wisconsin's state government in the hands
of Republicans.

"The silver lining in the November 6 elections is that Wisconsin has a
right-to-life governor, Scott Walker, and strong right-to-life
majorities in both houses of the Legislature!" the group's email
newsletter said.

Walker has yet to weigh in on the specific proposals.

The usual suspects of the republican members of the legislature are all vying to get in front of the line to be the one who brings these proposals to law!

"I support all those measures and would gladly be a lead or co-sponsor
on any of them," said Rep. Joel Kleefisch (R-Oconomowoc). "Any measure
to protect life is of the utmost highest priority."

Fellow crazy lawmaker Glenn Grothman, once again embarrasses the state of WI and his district, with such ridiculousness that his comments speak for themselves:

Sen. Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend) said he particularly wants to
advance the ban on sex-selection abortions because Democrats have
accused Republicans in recent years of conducting a "war on women." He
said there was nothing more pro-woman than preventing abortions that are
sought because of a child's sex.

"I think as we get more immigrants from other countries we have to be
particularly attuned to the abortion industry conniving with people to
reduce the number of women in our society," Grothman said.
Pasch called Grothman's comment ridiculous.

"I don't know how to respond to such nonsense," Pasch said. "This
isn't the first time Sen. Glenn Grothman has proposed or sponsored
legislation based on nonsense."

Finally the most telling paragraph, while there has a been an extreme right wing takeover of many states in the country, as we have seen with the bills that the WI republicans have forced through in the last two years, they like to take the most extreme bills in the country and turn it up to 11!

Wisconsin Right to Life has not spelled out its exact proposal, and the
group's legislative director, Susan Armacost, did not return a call. But
the brief description of the measure in its email newsletter indicated
it would go further than any other state by requiring the woman seeking
the abortion to view the ultrasound. In other states, women have the
option of looking away.

Yes we have "small government conservatives" debating if a woman is forced to look at an ultrasound she does not want or if she has the ability to "look away".

7 comments:

If the WI-SC can free itself from the current status quo, I think bringing two challenges to the redistricting legislation are merited, based upon the Wisconsin constitution.

WRT Assembly, the constitution says:

"The members of the assembly shall be chosen...such [that] districts [are]...as compact form as practicable."

Shown that the recently drawn districts are not as "compact as practicable" (i.e. a map having an average district size smaller than the current map, yet still allowing for the same amount of electors per district).

WRT Senate, the constitution says:

"The senators shall be elected by single districts of convenient contiguous territory..."

If it can be shown that the new districts are not convenient (i.e. not intuitive and do not follow traditional population/geographical boundaries), then more convenient districts could be drafted. The hard part is finding quantitative metrics to define "convenient" and then applying them to the old and new maps to show one to be superior to the other.

I think if numerical arguments could be applied to the existing map, compared to traditional maps, and then compared to alternative maps, there may be a shot (assuming the WI-SC is no longer prone to fits of choking).

I also think that Article 1, "All people are born equally free and independent,and have certain inherent rights; among these are..liberty; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

It could be argued that this government has not received equitable consent from the governed due to infringement of liberty based upon misappropriation of representative districts.

I think the numbers you mention above could be used to show that the existing maps are not practicable, convenient, or equal (rather, they much labor went in to them to ensure that the representation wasn't proportional). Your numbers, combined with the federal court records, would be enough to convince a sane court to redraw the districts so that they are non-partisan and as equitable, convenient, and practicable as possible.

I'd like to see a bill, mandate, whatever come before Congress that would exclude any man from being able to legislate over a woman's body, period!!! As a woman I take great offense to a man telling me what I can or cannot do with my body, in anything.

The majority of Americans and the majority of American women support a woman's right of choice in unplanned pregnancies. While ethics, religon, and biology may shape women's beliefs and actions, with unplanned pregnancies, economic reality is often the greatest factor. No short term tax credit will truly aid a deciding mother.

Ensuring pro-life choices (and a healthy life for a child) means truly adequate nutrition, housing, healthcare, and education. I think every child should have the option of a happy and healthy life. I also think our reality is such that women need to make choices to protect themselves and their families for numerous reasons.

I find it tragically ironic that the politicians who may often be ardently Pro-life are so opposed to funding adequate and appropriate services for children, families, and women. I have so far prevented myself from speaking the actual words, "Birth control and pregnancy termination services can help prevent you from coming up with Medicaid match funds for 18 years." This particuliar discordancy is livable. A change in our laws regarding Choice and large cuts to PP funding are not.